1216 réponses à ce sujet

[panamakira]

Aldandil wrote...

panamakira wrote...

Ugh....another article of those.....Again, it's my preference and personal opinion and I don't necessarily agree with that article. I don't want to play Origins v2.0. Maybe you guys do, I don't.

There's also some middle ground there. I would have wanted BioWare to make Origins 2.0, but just because DA2 is different from that, doesn't mean I can't look forward to it for what it is.

No, you're right there is a middle ground but some people bringing up these kinds of articles only think about themselves and wished for a carbon copy, when they didn't get that they blame Bioware for crucifying RPGs. I'm not interested in playing another Origins game. If I wanted that I would just play Origins for the 10th time. I love that game, I do but I'm ready to explore what DA2 has to offer. And at least you're willing to give it a chance.

I happen to believe you can't tell wether a game is good or bad until you finish it.

[Sengoku no Maou]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

"Evolve or perish."

All classic RPGs are dead.

Spot on.

[Satyricon331]

It occurred to me while reading that article that traditional cRPGs have such staunch fans that some of DAO's players who gave up after an hour or so might simply have been objects of the avid fans' proselytization efforts. I know I bought BG2 for a couple of friends (who wound up finding it too difficult).

If DA2 plays more like an action RPG I wonder whether it will have the same phenomenon, and to what extent.

[upsettingshorts]

There are both good and cliche arguments both for and against "progress." There are also arguments over exactly what progress is. Furthermore people have been playing cRPGs in different ways for different reasons for a long time, some changes will bother some and please others. That's the nature of the beast.

The categories and labels we create for ourselves and for the games we enjoy are as irrelevant as they are ultimately meaningless in a broad sense.

[In Exile]

Playing with these kinds of
settings just isn’t right for the traditional pause-play style. People
have argued that if you want that traditional experience then you can
simply play on a harder game mode, but this does not solve it. The
difficulty simply makes the game harder with modifiers such as friendly
fire (in nightmare mode) tougher enemies and so on, but it is still
played as an Action-RPG. While playing the demo, pausing the game to
issue an attack on an enemy just felt completely ridiculous, as they
would have already landed 3 attacks on you by the time you have done
one. The only possible way to do it is to pause and unpause the game
every half a second, therefore forcing players to simply mash buttons
until the enemy is dead. Dragon Age 2 is a real-time Action-RPG, and so
having the pause-play (that only really works with the slower pace of
turn-based RPG’s) is just an unnecessary feature rather than another way
to play through the game.

I don't know what this article writer expects from "traditional" RPGs, but this is how I (and others) play them. When we saw we pause and control the entire party, it means just that. Pausing after every single action to issue orders and observe combat. For this play-style, DA2 works just fine.

I had a rather long chat with a few veteran DA:O players, and we all agree that for our extensive pause & play, DA2 is in no way faster or less acessible than DA:O.

If some players very infrequently pause and so find that DA2 does not cater to that style, I would argue that neither did DA:O. If pausing is a "just-in-case" type approach and you want to pre-program party AI and play largely in real-time, the game should not cater to you by making combat slow and ponderous enough so you can think through your actions in real-time.

[Icy Magebane]

The only part about this that bothered me was the bit about level design being very linear. Then again, the article seemed heavily biased towards old school game design, so I'm not sure I trust this. Well, I'm glad I read it, but it didn't change my mind. I know what to expect from this game, and I'm satisfied with that. It's not going to be a masterpiece, but it sounds like a fun game nonetheless.

[sevalaricgirl]

I agree with pretty much everything that was said but that won't stop me from playing the game. I'll still play it and still love it and Skyrim will be out at the end of the year so I'll have my classic rpg (hopefully). There is no doubt about it in my mind, DA2 is an action rpg written with console players in mind. Like it or not, it is the truth. Now I do like it, don't get me wrong. I like games where the combat is so intense it gets your heart rate up, but I also love the classic rpg style of game. Origins is my favorite game and I'll play it for years to come even though I know the outcome.

Modifié par sevalaricgirl, 04 mars 2011 - 12:57 .

[Funkjoker]

Everything what I said in the past has been summarized in this article. It's a good one and I cannot agree more!

BioWare tends to bow to the mainstream. ME2 was the beginning, now it's DA2; I wonder what will happen once ME3 is out.

[kinna]

My problem with this article is that they condemn the whole game based on a demo that, as devs have said, is based on an older build. Also the button mashing claim is wrong because apparently autoattack is still available.

[Wuxia]

The main gripe the author seems to have with the game is the combat. Personally, the only major difference I saw was flashier animations. The actual pace of the combat seemed unchanged and I had a pause and play approach, the same as in Origins. Admittedly the enemies were very easy but the demo is on the easiest setting isn't it?
NB: My experience is with the PC versions of both games.

[Yrkoon]

This is a dupe thread

Uses the same article too.

[ManiacalEvil]

MOst misinformed bull**** I've ever heard. Want proof? See my signature.

[Dirk the Crusader]

Can't say I really care too much about DA2 being different from origins. I loved origins because of the world and the characters. I see DA2 as exploring another part of that world. Playing the demo also felt very much like playing origins, just with different animations and some changes I can easily live with.

The bull**** about open worlds is just silly by the way, the only game bioware made with a semi open world was Baldur's Gate and quite frankly it was a pain to explore every area.

Oh yea origins had homing arrows too

Modifié par Dirk the Crusader, 04 mars 2011 - 01:13 .

[Veracruz]

I want my RPGs to be good and interesting. The flavor (classic, action, sim) is irrelevant as long as they are good and interesting for me.

Modifié par Veracruz, 04 mars 2011 - 01:21 .

[Lumikki]

Not much to say, article is about Biowares direction, not about the game it self.

[AkiKishi]

ManiacalEvil wrote...

MOst misinformed bull**** I've ever heard. Want proof? See my signature.

You do realise that what you have in your signiture actually proves his point more than contradicting it don't you ? 

Anyways That was well worth reading and I agree with pretty much all of it.

[michaelius_pl]

RelentlessEcho wrote...

Well judging from the article the guy only played the demo. You can't judge a game based off a demo that is an old build.

So how else are you going to check if game is worth buying? 

[Funkjoker]

Inarborat wrote...

Haha, "evolution" = recycling the same ideas as previous games and cutting out features that worked as well as cutting others out instead of improving them? That's definitely not evolution.

You are so right. But this is the case for all the mainstreamers here.

[Yrkoon]

michaelius_pl wrote...

RelentlessEcho wrote...

Well judging from the article the guy only played the demo. You can't judge a game based off a demo that is an old build.

So how else are you going to check if game is worth buying? 

 By researching the totality of the footage that's out there, for one.  There have been quite a few  half hour (or longer) demonstrations of the game for us to observe over the past month.  There's another one tomorrow.

[Morroian]

The fact that this article appears to be based on playing the demo renders it completely invalid.

[Lumikki]

Inarborat wrote...

Haha, "evolution" = recycling the same ideas as previous games and cutting out features that worked as well as cutting others out instead of improving them? That's definitely not evolution.

Maybe in your point of view and I can even agree little bit. How ever, don't just looking what is cut, also look what is added. Now, what is more important for player is every person own taste, but that's all.

Modifié par Lumikki, 04 mars 2011 - 01:29 .

[Funkjoker]

Morroian wrote...

The fact that this article appears to be based on playing the demo renders it completely invalid.

because the main game will be totally different, i see

[Ziggeh]

In Exile wrote...

The only possible way to do it is to pause and unpause the game
every half a second,

I don't know what this article writer expects from "traditional" RPGs, but this is how I (and others) play them. When we saw we pause and control the entire party, it means just that. Pausing after every single action to issue orders and observe combat. For this play-style, DA2 works just fine.

That's exactly what I was thinking. He doesn't seem to be talking about difficulty at all there, merely a preference for a certain speed. If his definition of traditional is a certain pace, then it's bizarrely specific.

[Arrtis]

Problem is the demo had difficulty locked.
So they shouldnt be able to comment on it.